"We aren't helping these people. We are just dying and getting injured."

[welshTerrier2]

Are you someone who is supporting a future candidacy of a prominent Democrat? do you agree with their current position on Iraq? i'd like to know why you do ...

i am sick and tired of their tap dancing ... i am sick and tired of this war and i do NOT hear them making the case for us to get out NOW ... all i hear and see is nonsense about leaving in a year or starting to withdraw "some" troops ...

what the hell are we doing over there? some call for "diplomacy" ... yeah, right ... do you really believe that? i don't ... it's liberal garbage' it's a non-starter; it's a "why can't we all just get along" ... there will be no diplomacy ... there is a civil war going on in Iraq and it is not going to be solved by cute little conversations overseen by Western powers, the UN or even "moderate Arab states" ... it's all a fantasy that Iraqi factions, after all that's happened over thousands of years of history, will just "work it out" through negotiations ...

and how much more blood and treasure are you willing to spend over there while your little experiment is conducted? is another year just fine and dandy with you? then you get your ass over there and let someone else come home ...

i won't mention your precious candidate's name here but he or she IS THE PROBLEM; not the solution ... and i say they are the problem because they are failing to stand in full opposition to the bush agenda ... bush says "stay" and all they say in opposition is "well, OK, but not too long" ... and i'm sick of all this "we don't have any power" nonsense too ... the job that needs to be done is to stand in opposition and offer the American people a clear exit NOW alternative to bush!! not being in power is NO EXCUSE for not offering the right position to the voters this November ...

you support your candidate's position on Iraq? then respond to this:

source: http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0907-21.htm

legislators who truly care about learning what to do next and how this occupation is failing should contact members of the platoon profiled in the New York Times on Sunday.

Based in Hit, Iraq, in Anbar Province--a "tough assignment," as the Times puts it--several of the men quoted are unsparingly outspoken. Their words are infused with a kind of despair as they question what they are doing in Iraq. One sergeant talks about how "the great majority want us to go home." "No one understands why we are here and what our mission is," another Sergeant tells the Times reporter. "This war is lost. We aren't helping these people. We are just dying and getting injured."

These are the people Rumsfeld needs to listen to; these are the people Congress should listen to; these are the people who deserve a hearing.

Let me hear you say to these soldiers who can make no sense of what has been done to them why they should stay another year ... let me hear you explain to them why following your candidate's strategy they should have hope that something positive will be returned for their efforts ... i don't believe it; they don't believe it; the truth is, i don't believe you believe it either ... i just think you're backing up your candidate's position but i think you are flat out lying ... sorry to be harsh; that's what i believe ...

[Solly Mack]

1. There's this really nice guy my husband works with (military)

and my husband has no qualms about voicing his opinions of Bush, the invasion and everything in between...one day my husband was going at it...a shit eating grin the whole time...he knows it pisses some people off...but it's hard to refute facts...when this friend told him "5 years ago I would have gotten in a fist-fight with you over what you're saying - but not now...it's all true"

Rumsfeld doesn't listen to the troops - he listens to the true believers...who have no business being soldiers to begin with

A lot of people in government only hear what they want to hear...those people have no business being in government.

By denying how the majority of the troops really feel, the pretense that something noble and good can come out of Iraq is maintained. It's all for show...all the rhetoric...all the talking points. Just for show. An illusion ...

The troops were dying for lies...now they're dying to maintain an illusion

[Jacobin]

2. Rumsfeld is only trying to salvage his 'image'

His ego is so sick, he's willing to kill and maim and loot the treasury to try to pretend that the neo-con vision of muslims welcoming infidels into their country and stealing their resources would be accepted.

He's a sick, twisted pervert

[Solly Mack]

4. His image is part of that illusion

other parts include

Bush didn't lie, it was intelligence mistakes
America doesn't torture, we protect America with "alternative interrogation procedures"
troops aren't dying in vain - they're spreading democracy
America didn't commit a war crime by invading an innocent country("wars of aggression") - it's the larger war on terror to protect America

It's to maintain the illusion of America as the great liberator...

All of it, part and parcel to the illusion.

[paulk]

3. once again you do your best to somehow twist things

and put the onus on Democrats for what George Bush has done.

[welshTerrier2]

5. once again, you attack me instead of responding ...

give it up dude !!!

you consistently end up with the worst reply in my threads because you always fail to address the question ...

if you want to defend your candidate, do so ... attacking me is not a defense of your candidate's pathetic position ...

my post blames your candidate because he has not stood in full opposition to the bush agenda ... but still you post that i do not blame bush ...

why do you think we should remain in Iraq through next July? that's your candidate's position isn't it? what do you say to the soldiers quoted in the article? where's your statement ...

and all you can come up with is that i "somehow twist things" ... sell it someplace else, dude ... you've made no argument here ...

btw, thanks to those who recommended this thread ...

[paulk]

7. I'm sorry!

I mean, I understand that having the temerity to contradict you in any manner qualifies as an attack in your book, so I apologize for hurting your feelings.

It's also very nice of you to act as judge and jury in determining who wins the "worst post" award, after all, I do realize that your opinion is the only true opinion expressed on this board and that the rest of us should just keep our mouths shut.


I guess I shouldn't have posted on this thread - because, contrary to your assertions, I'm not "supporting the future candidacy of a prominent Democrat" - I'm supporting the future candidacy of ANY Democrat. I have never advocated for the election of anyone in 2008. My only criteria in that regard is that the candidate be a member of the Democratic Party.


I did address your post, however - in that this thread is just another in your never ending efforts to blame the Democrats for whatever it is your upset about on any particular day.

[welshTerrier2]

8. well, here's an offer you can't refuse

just for you, i'll be posting a special thread just about your candidate's crappy position on Iraq ...

perhaps you'll chime in on that one ...

btw, thanks so much for helping me keep this kicked ... i really appreciate your efforts ...

[paulk]

9. I'm sure if you name some names

instead of the usual passive aggressive attacks you prefer

you'll get more of a response on your new thread


:)

[Imagevision]

6. It's rally round the voters -- elections bring out the best of the bunch?

Dems were so meek until mid-terms start rolling around and their silence seems broken, at least for the time being...